From: Simon Horman <horms@verge.net.au>
To: Huang Ying <ying.huang@intel.com>
Cc: nigel@nigel.suspend2.net,
Kexec Mailing List <kexec@lists.infradead.org>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@sisk.pl>,
"Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@xmission.com>,
Pavel Machek <pavel@ucw.cz>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
mingo@elte.hu, Vivek Goyal <vgoyal@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] kexec jump: fix code size checking
Date: Wed, 13 Aug 2008 13:48:59 +1000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20080813034857.GA14269@verge.net.au> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1218596715.24951.69.camel@caritas-dev.intel.com>
On Wed, Aug 13, 2008 at 11:05:15AM +0800, Huang Ying wrote:
> On Wed, 2008-08-13 at 12:47 +1000, Simon Horman wrote:
> > On Wed, Aug 13, 2008 at 09:04:35AM +0800, Huang Ying wrote:
> > > Fix building issue when CONFIG_KEXEC=n. Thanks to Vivek Goyal for his
> > > reminding.
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: Huang Ying <ying.huang@intel.com>
> > >
> > > ---
> > > include/asm-x86/kexec.h | 3 +++
> > > 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+)
> > >
> > > --- a/include/asm-x86/kexec.h
> > > +++ b/include/asm-x86/kexec.h
> > > @@ -43,6 +43,9 @@
> > >
> > > #ifdef CONFIG_X86_32
> > > # define KEXEC_CONTROL_CODE_MAX_SIZE 2048
> > > +# ifndef CONFIG_KEXEC
> > > +# define kexec_control_code_size 0
> > > +# endif
> > > #endif
> > >
> > > #ifndef __ASSEMBLY__
> >
> > Is it impossible to skip the linker check in the !CONFIG_KEXEC case?
>
> It is possible. I think there are several ways to do that.
>
> 1) use #ifdef in vmlinux_32.lds.S, such as:
>
> #ifdef CONFIG_KEXEC
> ASSERT(kexec_control_code_size <= KEXEC_CONTROL_CODE_MAX_SIZE,
> "kexec control code size is too big")
> #endif
>
> 2) #define a macro for kexec check ld script in asm/kexec.h, such as:
>
> #define LD_CHECK_KEXEC() ASSERT(kexec_control_code_size <= KEXEC_CONTROL_CODE_MAX_SIZE, \
> "kexec control code size is too big")
>
> and use that in vmlinux_32.lds.S.
>
> 3) #define kexec_control_code_size 0. So that the check can be passed
> always. And, code size = 0 is reasonable for no code (CONFIG_KEXEC=n).
>
>
> I think 3) is better. What do you think about?
Hi Huang,
I think that 1) with possibly the slight variation of moving
#include <asm/kexec.h> inside #ifdef CONFIG_KEXEC is better
because it avoids introducing kexec_control_code_size,
which is currently only used in arch/x86/kernel/relocate_kernel_32.S
and arch/x86/kernel/vmlinux_32.lds.S, into kexec.h.
/* Link time checks */
#ifdef CONFIG_KEXEC
#include <asm/kexec.h>
ASSERT(kexec_control_code_size <= KEXEC_CONTROL_CODE_MAX_SIZE,
"kexec control code size is too big")
#endif
My second preference would be 3) as it seems simpler than 2).
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2008-08-13 3:49 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2008-08-13 1:04 [PATCH] kexec jump: fix code size checking Huang Ying
2008-08-13 2:47 ` Simon Horman
2008-08-13 3:05 ` Huang Ying
2008-08-13 3:40 ` Eric W. Biederman
2008-08-13 5:18 ` Huang Ying
2008-08-13 5:51 ` Simon Horman
2008-08-13 3:48 ` Simon Horman [this message]
2008-08-13 13:21 ` Vivek Goyal
2008-08-13 13:19 ` Vivek Goyal
2008-08-13 17:07 ` Andrew Morton
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20080813034857.GA14269@verge.net.au \
--to=horms@verge.net.au \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=ebiederm@xmission.com \
--cc=kexec@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=nigel@nigel.suspend2.net \
--cc=pavel@ucw.cz \
--cc=rjw@sisk.pl \
--cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=vgoyal@redhat.com \
--cc=ying.huang@intel.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox